Larry Wall wrote:
> Jonathan Lang wrote:
> : Larry Wall wrote:
> : > Jonathan Lang wrote:
> Also, there will be access to the list of call candidates for SUPER::
> (and presumably ROLE::) such that the class's method can get explicit
> control of which super/role method or methods get called. So
* The Perl 6 Summarizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-12-16 11:57]:
> bear in mind that the authors of the paper use the term
> 'trait' for what we're calling a 'role' (We already have
> traits you see).
>
> http://www.cse.ogi.edu/~black/publications/TR_CSE_02-012.pdf
> -- Traits p
Larry Wall wrote:
> Maybe there's an intermediate syntactic form like:
>
> $x but subclass MyClass does FooBar[bar] { }
IMHO, C should be defined as generating a singleton class that
derives from the variable's class and composes a specified role - but not
neccessarily a I role. How about de
On Sat, Dec 20, 2003 at 12:41:10PM -0800, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: So what happens if more than one of the candidates is tagged as the
: default? The same thing as if none of them was? This could happen if
: both Predator and Pet have declared their 'feed' methods as the default.
Could blow up,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Larry Wall) writes:
> is classof($x)
Ouch. $x's class isn't a property or trait of it?
> class AnonClass is classof($x) does FooBar { }.bless($x, foobar => bar)
I don't understand what the bit at the end is doing. This is calling .bless
on the overriden method? And I'm not
Larry Wall wrote:
> Jonathan Lang wrote:
> : > Arguably, the role's might be required to declare their methods
> : > "multi" if they want to participate in this, but that's one of those
> : > things that feel like they ought to be declared by the user rather
> : > than the definer. On the other h
On Sat, Dec 20, 2003 at 03:12:53PM -0800, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: Naming in what way? As a descriptive term for discussing them in general,
: or naming individual collections for reference purposes in the code?
I meant naming primarily as in how you select a particular group of them.
They don't
Larry Wall wrote:
> Jonathan Lang wrote:
> : It also occurs to me that traits can be thought of
> : as adjectives (thus the "is " vs. "is a " distinction) -
> : another way to attach an adjective to a noun in English is to prepend
> : it to the noun:
> :
> : my Dog $Spot is red;
> : my black
Larry Wall wrote:
> Jonathan Lang wrote:
> : In a similar vein, what about making a disjunction of classes in an
> : C or C clause synonymous with a sequence of appropriate
> : clauses? Ditto with traits and C, roles and C, attributes
> : and C, etc.; thus:
> :
> : class DangerousPet does Pe
On Sat, Dec 20, 2003 at 03:21:10PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: On Sat, Dec 20, 2003 at 03:12:53PM -0800, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: : Why not do it the same way that namespace scoping collisions are resolved:
: : the local scope trumps the caller's scope. Rinse, lather, repeat.
Actually, I didn't se
- Original Message -
From: "Jonathan Lang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2003 3:41 PM
Subject: [perl] Re: Object Order of Precedence (Was: Vocabulary)
> Larry Wall wrote:
> > If DangerousPet doesn't define a feed method at all, then we might
>
Joe Gottman writes:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Jonathan Lang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2003 3:41 PM
> Subject: [perl] Re: Object Order of Precedence (Was: Vocabulary)
>
>
> > Larry Wall wrote:
> > > If DangerousPet doesn't defin
Luke Palmer wrote:
Joe Gottman writes:
- Original Message -
From: "Jonathan Lang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2003 3:41 PM
Subject: [perl] Re: Object Order of Precedence (Was: Vocabulary)
Larry Wall wrote:
If DangerousPet doesn't define a
13 matches
Mail list logo
